From: Valerie Clement Subject: Re: Test results for ext4 Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:34:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4846B5F9.8050906@bull.net> References: <48402253.8040407@bull.net> <4841A871.3020500@redhat.com> <4844B71F.3070906@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: ext4 development To: Eric Sandeen Return-path: Received: from ecfrec.frec.bull.fr ([129.183.4.8]:32828 "EHLO ecfrec.frec.bull.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753799AbYFDPel (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 11:34:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4844B71F.3070906@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Eric Sandeen wrote: > Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Valerie Clement wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Since a couple of weeks, I did batches of tests to have some perfor= mance >>> numbers for the new ext4 features like uninit_groups, flex_bg or >>> journal_checksum on a 5TB filesystem. >>> I tried to test allmost all combinations of mkfs and mount options,= but >>> I put only a subset of them in the result tables, the most signific= ant >>> for me. >>> >>> I had started to do these tests on a kernel 2.6.26-rc1, but I'd got= several >>> hangs and crashes occuring randomly outside ext4, sometimes in the = slab >>> code or in the scsi driver eg., and which were not reproductible. >>> Since 2.6.26-rc2, no crash or hang occur with ext4 on my system. >>> >>> The first results and the test description are available here: >>> http://www.bullopensource.org/ext4/20080530/ffsb-write-2.6.26-rc2.h= tml >>> http://www.bullopensource.org/ext4/20080530/ffsb-readwrite-2.6.26-r= c2.html >>> >> One other question on the tests; am I reading correctly that ext3 us= ed >> "data=3Dwriteback" but ext4 used the default data=3Dordered mode? >=20 > I was interested in the results, especially since ext3 seemed to pret= ty > well match ext4 for throughput, although the cpu utilization differed= =2E >=20 > I re-ran the same ffsb profiles on an 8G, 4-way opteron box, connecte= d > to a "Vendor: WINSYS Model: SF2372" 2T hardware raid array with 512= MB > cache, connected via fibrechannel. >=20 > Reads go pretty fast: >=20 > # dd if=3D/dev/sdc bs=3D16M count=3D512 iflag=3Ddirect of=3D/dev/null > 8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 23.2257 seconds, 370 MB/s >=20 > I got some different numbers.... >=20 > This was with e2fsprogs-1.39 for ext3, e2fsprogs-1.40.10 for ext4, an= d > xfsprogs-2.9.8 for xfs. I was using xfsprogs-2.9.0, maybe too old version... I'm updating them and I'll run my tests again. >=20 > I used defaults except; data=3Dwriteback for ext[34] and the nobarrie= r > option for xfs. ext3 was made with 128 byte inodes, ext4 with 256-by= te > (new default). XFS used stock mkfs. I formatted the entire block > device /dev/sdc. >=20 > For the large file write test: >=20 > MB/s CPU % > ext3 140 90.7 > ext4 182 50.2 > xfs 222 145.0 >=20 > And for the small random readwrite test: >=20 > trans/s CPU % > ext3 9830 12.2 > ext4 11996 18.1 > xfs 13863 23.5 >=20 > Not sure what the difference is ... >=20 > If you have your tests scripted up I'd be interested to run all the > variations on this hardware as well, as it seems to show more through= put > differences... I added a link to the scripts I used in the test description section in= : http://www.bullopensource.org/ext4/20080530/ffsb-write-2.6.26-rc2.html http://www.bullopensource.org/ext4/20080530/ffsb-readwrite-2.6.26-rc2.h= tml Val=E9rie -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html